Comparison of Surgical Wait Times and Procedure Length in the Management of Postaxial Polydactyly Using Local or General Anesthesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: For infants with ulnar polydactyly, surgical removal of the supernumerary digit can be performed under general or local anesthetic. This study evaluated the wait times, surgical duration, and sedation times associated with performing the procedure under local versus general anesthetic in infants with ulnar polydactyly. Methods: The databases of three surgeons at our institution were reviewed for children less than 2 years of age who underwent surgery for non-syndromic ulnar polydactyly. Data collection included patient demographics, wait times, duration of surgery and sedation and complications. Results: The study included children (n = 55) who received treatment under local (n = 22) or general (n = 33) anesthesia. The wait times for the local anesthetic group were significantly shorter than the general anesthetic group (p < 0.05) for: referral to first consultation appointment; referral to surgery date, and decision date to surgery date. The duration of surgery (17.9 ± 6.9 vs 36.6 ± 20.2 min) and sedation time (26.3 ± 11.1 vs 74.8 ± 29.1 min) were significantly shorter in the local anaesthetic group (p < 0.05). There were no differences in complication rates between the groups. Conclusion: In this single-institution retrospective analysis, treatment of non-syndromic ulnar polydactyly with local anesthetic and bottle sedation was associated with shorter wait times, and duration of surgery and sedation. Level of Evidence: III, retrospective chart review and quality improvement initiative
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".